A Novel Feature Extraction Scheme for Medical X-Ray Images

Prachi.G.Bhende Int. Journal of Engineering Research and Applications www.ijera.com
ISSN: 2248-9622, Vol. 6, Issue 2, (Part -6) February 2016, pp.53-60
www.ijera.com 53|P a g e
A Novel Feature Extraction Scheme for Medical X-Ray Images
1
Prachi.G.Bhende, 2
Dr.A.N.Cheeran
Department of Electrical Engineering, VJTI, Mumbai, India
Department of Electrical Engineering, VJTI, Mumbai, India
ABSTRACT
X-ray images are gray scale images with almost the same textural characteristic. Conventional texture or color
features cannot be used for appropriate categorization in medical x-ray image archives. This paper presents a
novel combination of methods like GLCM, LBP and HOG for extracting distinctive invariant features from X-
ray images belonging to IRMA (Image Retrieval in Medical applications) database that can be used to perform
reliable matching between different views of an object or scene. GLCM represents the distributions of the
intensities and the information about relative positions of neighboring pixels of an image. The LBP features are
invariant to image scale and rotation, change in 3D viewpoint, addition of noise, and change in illumination A
HOG feature vector represents local shape of an object, having edge information at plural cells. These features
have been exploited in different algorithms for automatic classification of medical X-ray images. Excellent
experimental results obtained in true problems of rotation invariance, particular rotation angle, demonstrate that
good discrimination can be achieved with the occurrence statistics of simple rotation invariant local binary
patterns.
Keywords: Gray level co-occurrence matrix (GLCM), Local Binary Pattern (LBP), Histogram of Oriented
Gradients (HOG)
I. INTRODUCTION
Textures provide essential information for
many image classification tasks. Much research has
been done on texture classification during the last
three decades, most traditional approaches include
gray level co-occurrence matrices (GLCM), second-
order statistic method, Gauss–Markov random field
and local linear transform, which are restricted to the
analysis of spatial relations between neighboring
pixels in a small image region [1,2]. In various
applications, to deal with the semantic gap trouble,
texture features are employed. For example, it is used
to explain organ‟s tissues in the medical imaging
field. Thus, the majority of the research in the area of
texture analysis is devoted to developing the
inequitable capability of the features extracted from
the image. Recently many local descriptors are
proposed for object recognition and image retrieval.
Local binary pattern (LBP), a non-parametric
technique summarizing the local structures of an
image efficiently, is one of the most used texture
descriptors in image analysis. LBP was initially
proposed by Timo Ojala for texture description and
has been broadly exploited in numerous applications.
The most important properties of LBP features are
tolerance against the monotonic illumination changes
and computational simplicity as well [3]. In recent
years, LBP features have been extensively exploited
for facial image analysis, together with face
detection, face recognition; facial expression
analysis, gender/age categorization and some other
applications. In the meantime, different variations of
the original LBP have been proposed for an improved
performance. This work focuses on gray-scale and
rotation invariant texture classification, which has
been addressed by Chen and Kundu [4] and Wu and
Wei [5]. Both studies approached gray-scale
invariance by assuming that the gray-scale
transformation is a linear function. This is a
somewhat strong simplification, which may limit the
usefulness of the proposed methods. Chen and Kundu
realized gray-scale invariance by global
normalization of the input image using histogram
equalization. This is not a general solution however,
as global histogram equalization cannot correct intra
image (local) gray-scale variations [4]. Mikolajczyk
et al. compared the performance of the several local
descriptors and showed that the best matching results
were obtained by the Scale Invariant Feature
Transform (SIFT) descriptor [6]. Dalal et al. [7]
proposed a human detection algorithm using
histograms of oriented gradients (HOG) which are
similar with the features used in the SIFT descriptor.
HOG features are calculated by taking orientation
histograms of edge intensity in a local region. They
are designed by imitating the visual information
processing in the brain and have robustness for local
changes of appearances, and position. Dalal et al.
extracted the HOG features from all locations of a
dense grid from an image region and the combined
features are classified by using linear SVM. They
showed that the grids of HOG descriptors
significantly outer-performed existing feature sets for
human detection. Ke et al. applied Principal
RESEARCH ARTICLE OPEN ACCESS

Components Analysis (PCA) to reduce the
dimensionality of the feature vectors and tested them
in an image retrieval application [8]. There are also
many other feature detection methods, as edge
detection, corner detection, etc. which have their own
advantages. As the x-ray images are characterized
with contrast variation and non-uniform intensity
background, weak signal-to-noise ratio, digitized x-
ray projections noise, and high frequency noise,
extracting desired features is quite challenging.
The work carried out in this paper focuses on
deriving a set of unique feature vectors to support
easy and fast medical X-Ray image classification
using a combination of global texture and local
features by applying GLCM, LBP, HOG techniques.
In the next section, the proposed algorithms are
discussed. Then the experimental results are
described in section 3. The conclusion and the future
works are given in section 4.
II. METHODOLOGY and RESULT
ANALYSIS
Feature detection and matching are essential
components of many computer vision applications.
Texture is an important characteristics used in
identifying regions of interest in an image [9].
Among the variety of techniques available for feature
extraction the following methods based on local and
global feature extraction process are applied to the X-
ray Images belonging to IRMA database as they can
deal with gray level variations problem efficiently.
2.1. Implementation of Grey Level Co-occurrence
Matrices
Grey Level Co-occurrence Matrices (GLCM) is
one of the well-known texture extraction techniques
which measures second order texture characteristics.
One of the simplest approaches for describing texture
is to use statistical moments of the intensity
histogram of an image or region [10, 11]. Using only
histograms in calculation will result in measures of
texture that carry only information about distribution
of intensities, but not about the relative position of
pixels with respect to each other in that texture.
Using a statistical approach such as co-occurrence
matrix will help to provide valuable information
about the relative position of the neighbouring pixels
in an image.
The GLCM of an N × N image, containing pixels
with gray levels 0, 1, 2…., G-1 is a matrix P (i, j),
where each element of the matrix represents the
probability of joint occurrence of intensity levels i
and j at a certain distance and an angle θ, is
calculated. The four occurrence matrixes of GLCM
are obtained from four different directions (θ {0,
90, 45, and 135}) at global level.
Co-occurrence: Given an image I, of size N×N, the
co-occurrence, matrix P can be defined as
𝑃 𝑖, 𝑗 =
1, 𝑖𝑓 𝐼 𝑥, 𝑦 = 𝑖 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝐼 𝑥 + ∆𝑥, 𝑦 + ∆𝑦 = 𝑗
0, 𝑜𝑡𝑕𝑒𝑟𝑤𝑖𝑠𝑒
𝑁
𝑦=1
𝑁
𝑥=1
(1)
Here, the offset (Δx, Δy), is specifying the
distance between the pixel-of-interest and its
neighbour. Note that the offset (Δx, Δy)
parameterization makes the co-occurrence matrix
sensitive to rotation. Choosing an offset vector, such
that the rotation of the image is not equal to 180
degrees, will result in a different co-occurrence
matrix for the same (rotated) image. This can be
avoided by forming the co-occurrence matrix using a
set of offsets sweeping through 180 degrees at the
same distance parameter D to achieve a degree of
rotational invariance (i.e., [0 D] for 0 : P horizontal,
[-D D] for 45 : P right diagonal, [-D 0] for 90 : P
vertical, and [-D -D] for 135 : P left diagonal).These
measures are arrays termed angular nearest neighbour
spatial dependence matrices, which considers nearest
resolution cells in particular direction.
Figure2.1.Resolution cells1and 5 are 0 ͦ(horizontal)
nearest neighbors to center pixel(resolution cell)
*;resolution cells 2 and 6 are 135 ͦ nearest neighbors;
resolution cells 4 and 8 are 45 ͦ nearest neighbors;
resolution cells 3 and 7 are 90 ͦ nearest neighbors to *.
Figure 2.2 illustrates the details of the process to
generate the four co-occurrence matrices using Ng =
5 levels for the offsets {[0 1], [-1 1], [-1 0], [-1 -1]}
that are defined as one neighboring pixel in the
possible four directions. We can see that two
neighboring pixels (2, 1) of the input image is
reflected in PH concurrence matrix as 3, because
there are 3 occurrences of the pixel intensity value 2
and pixel intensity value 1 adjacent to each other in
the input image. The neighboring pixels (1, 2) will
occur again 3 times in PH, which makes these
matrices symmetric. In the same manner, the other
three matrices PV, PLD, PRD are calculated.

Figure 2.2 Implementation of GLCM for four different offsets [11]
The four matrices can be used separately for
classification, and then the final decision can be
formed by fusing the four decisions. As these
matrices are symmetric, it is more convenient to use
the upper or lower diagonal matrix coefficients in
forming the vectors. So, instead of having a vector
length of Ng × Ng, the vector size is reduced to (Ng
× Ng + Ng)/2 which helps to speed up the process
without affecting the recognition performance.
Applying this technique to a gray scale X-ray image
(Pij) of hand had given the texture context
information adequately, as a gray tone spatial
dependence matrix which is function of the angular
relationship between the neighbouring resolution
cells as well as a function of distance between them.
2.2. Implementation of Local Binary Pattern
In this method a gray scale and rotation invariant
texture operator based on local binary patterns (LBP)
proposed by Ojala [3] is applied for the medical x-ray
images from IRMA database. Starting from the joint
distribution of gray values of a circularly symmetric
neighbor set of eight pixels in a 3 × 3 neighborhood,
we derive an operator that is by definition invariant
against any monotonic transformation of the gray
scale. Rotation invariance is achieved by recognizing
that this gray scale invariant operator incorporates a
fixed set of rotation invariant patterns.
I: Gray Scale and Rotation Invariant Local
Binary Patterns
We start the derivation of gray scale and rotation
invariant texture operator by defining texture T in a
local 3 × 3 neighborhood of a monochrome texture
image as the joint distribution of the gray levels of
the nine image pixels:
T = P (g0, g1, g2, g3, g4, g5, g6, g7, g8) (2)
where gi (I = 0, 1, .., 8), correspond to the gray values
of the pixels in the 3 × 3 neighborhood according to
the spatial layout illustrated in Fig. 2.2. The gray
values of diagonal pixels (g2, g4, g6, and g8) are
determined by interpolation.
Figure2.3: The circularly symmetric neighbour set of
eight pixels in a 3 × 3 neighborhood
II: Achieving Gray Scale Invariance
As the first step towards gray scale invariance
we subtract, without losing information, the gray
value of the centre pixel (g0) from the gray values of
the eight surrounding pixels of the circularly
symmetric neighborhood (gi, I = 1,..., 8) giving:
T = P (g0, g1 – g0, g2 – g0, g3 – g0, g4 – g0, g5 – g0, g6 – g0,
g7 – g0, g8 – g0) (3)
Next, assume that differences gi – g0 are independent
of g0, which allows to factorize Eq. (3):
T ≈ P (g0) P(g1 – g0, g2 – g0, g3 – g0, g4 – g0, g5 – g0, g6 –
g0, g7 – g0, g8 – g0) (4)
Signed differences gi – g0 are not affected by changes
in mean luminance, hence the joint difference
distribution is invariant against gray scale shifts. We
achieve invariance with respect to the scaling of the
gray scale by considering just the signs of the
differences instead of their exact values:
T ≈ p(s (g1 – g0), s(g2 – g0), s(g3 – g0), ......., s(g8 –
g0))......... (5)
Where
s(x)=
1, 𝑥 ≥ 0
0, 𝑥 < 0
(6)
If eq. (5) is formulated slightly differently, an
expression similar to the LBP (Local Binary Pattern)
operator is obtained:
LBP8 = 𝑠(gi − 𝑔0)8
𝑖=1 2𝑖−1
(7)

The two differences between LBP8 and the LBP
operator are: 1) the pixels in the neighbor set are
indexed so that they form a circular chain, and 2) the
gray values of the diagonal pixels are determined by
interpolation. Both modifications are necessary to
obtain the circularly symmetric neighbor set, which
allows for deriving a rotation invariant version of
LBP8. For notational reasons we augment LBP with
subscript 8 to denote that the LBP8 operator is
determined from the 8 pixels in a 3 × 3 neighborhood
[12].
III: Achieving Rotation Invariance
The LBP8 operator produces 256 (28
) different
output values, corresponding to the 256 different
binary patterns that can be formed by the eight pixels
in the neighbor set. When the image is rotated, the
gray values gi will correspondingly move along the
perimeter of the circle around g0. Since we always
assign g1 to be the gray value of element (0, 1), to the
right of g0, rotating a particular binary pattern
naturally results in a different LBP8 value [13]. This
does not apply to patterns 000000002 and 111111112
which remain constant at all rotation angles. To
remove the effect of rotation, i.e. to assign a unique
identifier to each rotation invariant local binary
pattern we define:
𝐿𝐵𝑃8
𝑟𝐼36
= min⁡{𝑅𝑂𝑅 LBP8, i } 𝑖 = 0,1, … . ,7} (8)
where ROR (x, i) performs a circular bit-wise right
shift on the 8-bit number x i times. In terms of image
pixels eq. (8) simply corresponds to rotating the
neighbor set clockwise so many times that a maximal
number of the most significant bits, starting from g8
are 0. We observe that 𝐿𝐵𝑃8
𝑟𝐼36
can have 36 different
values, corresponding to the 36 unique rotation
invariant local binary patterns illustrated in Fig. 2.4,
hence the superscript ri36. LBP8
ri36
quantifies the
occurrence statistics of these patterns corresponding
to certain micro features in the image, hence the
patterns can be considered as feature detectors. For
example, pattern #0 detects bright spots, #8 dark
spots and flat areas, and #4 edges. Hence, obtained
the gray scale and rotation invariant operator 𝐿𝐵𝑃8
𝑟𝐼36
that was designated as LBPROT in [14].
Figure 2.4 The 36 unique rotation invariant binary patterns that can occur in the eight pixel circularly symmetric
neighbor set. Black and white circles correspond to bit values of 0 and 1 in the 8-bit output of the LBP8
operator. The first row contains the nine „uniform‟ patterns and the number inside them corresponds to their
unique LBP8
riu2
values.
IV: Improved Rotation Invariance with ‘Uniform’
Patterns
However, practical experiments showed that
𝐿𝐵𝑃8
𝑟𝐼36
as such does not provide a very good
discrimination. There are two reasons:
1) the performance of the 36 individual patterns in
discrimination of rotated textures varies greatly:
while some patterns sustain rotation quite well, other
patterns do not and only confuse the analysis.
Consequently, using all 36 patterns leads to a
suboptimal result (as addressed above).
2) crude quantization of the angular space at 45
intervals
The varying performance of individual patterns
attributes to the spatial structure of the patterns. To
quantify this we define an uniformity measure U
(„pattern‟), which corresponds to the number of
spatial transitions (bitwise 0/1 changes) in the pattern
[15]. The larger the uniformity value U of a pattern,
the larger number of spatial transitions occurs in the
pattern, the more likely the pattern is to change to a
different pattern upon rotation in digital domain.
Based on this argument we designate patterns that
have U value of at most 2 as „uniform‟ and propose
the following operator for gray scale and rotation
invariant texture description instead of 𝐿𝐵𝑃8
𝑟𝐼36
:
𝐿𝐵𝑃8
𝑟𝑖𝑢 2
=
𝑠(gi − g0)8
𝑖=1
9 𝑜𝑡𝑕𝑒𝑟𝑤𝑖𝑠𝑒
if U (LBP8) ≤ 2
(9)
Equation (9) corresponds to giving a unique label to
the nine uniform patterns illustrated in the first row of
Fig. 2.3 (label corresponds to the number of „1‟ bits
in the pattern), the 27 other patterns being grouped
under the miscellaneous label (9). Superscript riu2
corresponds to the use of rotation invariant uniform
patterns that have U value of at most 2.
The selection of uniform patterns with the
simultaneous compression of non-uniform patterns is

also supported by the fact that the former tend to
dominate in deterministic texture.
V: Improved Angular Resolution with a 16 pixel
neighborhood
It was noted earlier that the rotation invariance of
𝐿𝐵𝑃8
𝑟𝑖𝑢 2
is hampered by the crude 45 quantization of
the angular space provided by the neighbor set of
eight pixels. To address this a modification was
presented, where the angular space is quantized at a
finer resolution of 22.5 intervals. This is
accomplished with the circularly symmetric neighbor
set of 16 pixels illustrated in Fig.2.5. Again, the gray
values of neighbors which do not fall exactly in the
centre of pixels are estimated by interpolation. Note
that increase the size of the local neighborhood to 5
× 5 pixels, as the eight added neighbors would not
provide too much new information if inserted into the
3 × 3 neighborhood [16,17].
An additional advantage is the different spatial
resolution, if we should want to perform multi-
resolution analysis.
Figure 2.5: The circularly symmetric neighbor set of
16 pixels in a 5x5 neighborhood
Following the derivation of LBP8, we first define the
16-bit version of the rotation variant LBP in Fig. 2.5.
LBP16 = 𝑠(hi − h0)2𝑖−116
𝑖=1 (10)
The LBP16 operator has 65536 (216
) different output
values and 243 different rotation invariant patterns
can occur in the circularly symmetric set of 16 pixels.
Choosing again the uniform rotation invariant
patterns that have at most two 0/1 transitions, we
define 𝐿𝐵𝑃16
𝑟𝑖𝑢 2
, the 16-bit version of 𝐿𝐵𝑃8
𝑟𝑖𝑢 2
:
𝐿𝐵𝑃16
𝑟𝑖𝑢 2
=
{ 𝑠 hi − h0 2𝑖−1
𝑖𝑓 𝑈 LBP16 ≤16
𝑖=1
2 𝑜𝑟 17 𝑜𝑡𝑕𝑒𝑟𝑤𝑖𝑠𝑒 (11)
Thus, the 𝐿𝐵𝑃16
𝑟𝑖𝑢 2
operator has 18 distinct output
values, of which values from 0 (pattern
00000000000000002) to 16 (pattern
11111111111111112) correspond to the number of 1
bits in the 17 unique uniform rotation invariant
patterns, and value 17 denotes the miscellaneous
class of all non-uniform patterns. In practice the
mapping from LBP16 to LBP16
riu2
is implemented
with a lookup table of 216 elements [18-20].
 LBP Results:
Implementing above mentioned LBP (operators)
technique for feature extraction we get following
output and satisfactory results are found with good
success rate. We carried out our experiment for the
X-ray images from IRMA database, on near about
300 hand and spine images
Figure 2.6: LBP results: a- Original Hand Image, b-Uniform Rotation Invariant Pattern Histogram , c-Uniform
Pattern Histogram
In the case of LBP8
riu2
nine „uniform‟ patterns
out of the 36 possible patterns are chosen, merging
the remaining 27 under the „miscellaneous‟ label.
Similarly, in the case of LBP16
riu2
consider only 7%
(17 out of 243) of the possible rotation invariant
patterns. Taking into account a minority of the
possible patterns, and merging a majority of them,
could imply that most of the pattern information is
been not considered. However, this is not the case, as
the „uniform‟ patterns tend to be the dominant
structure.

2.3: Implementation of HOG- Histograms of
Oriented Gradients
Histograms of Oriented Gradients (HOG) are
one of the well known features for object recognition
HOG features are calculated by taking orientation
histograms of edge intensity in a local region. Local
object appearance and shape can often be
characterized rather well by the distribution of local
intensity gradients or edge detection.HOG features
are used in the SIFT descriptor proposed by Lowe
[21-23]. Initially, edge gradients and orientations are
calculated at each pixel in the local region considered
of an image. Then Sobel ﬁlters are used to obtain the
edge gradients and orientations [24, 25]. The gradient
magnitude m(x, y) and orientation θ(x, y) are
calculated using the x-and y-directional as gradients
dx (x, y) and dy (x, y) computed by Sobel ﬁlter as:
m (x, y) = 𝑑𝑥(𝑥, 𝑦)2 + 𝑑𝑦(𝑥, 𝑦)2
𝜃 = tan−1
𝑑𝑦(𝑥, 𝑦)/𝑑𝑥(𝑥, 𝑦)
This local region is divided into small spatial area
called “cell” as shown below in figure 2.7. The size
of the cell is 4 × 4 pixels. Histograms of edge
gradients with 8 orientations are calculated from each
of the local cells. Then the total number of HOG
features becomes 128 = 8× (4×4) and they constitute
a HOG feature vector. To avoid sudden changes in
the descriptor with small changes in the position of
the window, and to give less emphasis to gradients
that are far from the center of the descriptor, a
Gaussian weighting function with σ equal to one half
the width of the descriptor window is used to assign a
weight to the magnitude of each pixel [26-31].
Figure 2.7: Extraction Process of HOG features. The HOG features are extracted from local regions with 16 ×
16 pixels. Histograms of edge gradients with 8 orientations are calculated from each of 4 × 4 local cells. The
edge gradients and orientations are obtained by applying Sobel filters. Thus the total number of HOG features
becomes 128 = 8 × (4 × 4) [28].
Below Figure2.8 shows the result of HOG experiment tested on X-ray hand Image from IRMA dataset.
Figure(a) Figure(b) Figure(c) Figure (d)
Figure 2.8: Result of HOG Experiment
The figure 2.8 from left shows(a) original x-ray hand
image (3805 ×12 pixels), then (b)segmented x-ray
hand image (512×512 pixels), (c)HOG Output
image(1366× 662 pixels) after Extraction process
which gives HOG feature size – 1× 142884 and its
orientation histogram view in (d).
III. CONCLUSION
In this paper, a theoretically and computationally
simple approach which is robust in terms of gray
scale variations and which is shown to discriminate a
large range of rotated textures efficiently is
discussed. The results of Texture feature extraction
methods mainly GLCM, LBP and HOG which gave
us a combination of some global and local features
are presented. Two rotation invariant LBP operators
(LBP8
riu2
& LBP16
riu2
) having different spatial
configuration of the circularly symmetric neighbor
set, which determines the angular resolution is
applied. As expected, LBP16
riu2
with its more precise
quantization of the angular space provides a solid

performance. Even larger circularly symmetric
neighbor sets, say 24 or 32 pixels with a suitable
spatial predicate, which would offer even better
angular resolution can be applied.
Also HOG features are extracted from all
locations of a grid on the image as candidates of the
feature vectors and can be used for classification. It is
known that HOG features are robust to the local
geometric and photometric transformations. If the
translations or rotations of the object are much
smaller than the local spatial bin size, their effect is
small. In future more feature extraction process
which considers another important properties like
scale invariance etc., helpful for X-ray image analysis
and classification can be studied.
REFERENCES
[1.] Mohammad Reza Zare, Woo Chaw Seng,
Ahmed Mueen, “Automatic Classification of
Medical X-ray Images”, Malaysian Journal
of Computational of Computer Science,
Vol.26 (1), 2013.
[2.] R. M. Haralick, “Statistical and structural
approaches to texture”, Proc. IEEE, pp. 786-
804, May 1979.
[3.] T. Ojala, K. Valkealahti, E. Oja, and M.
PietikaÈinen, “Texture Discrimination with
Multi-Dimensional Distributions of Signed
Gray Level Differences”, Pattern
Recognition, Vol. 34, pp.727-739, 2001.
[4.] Chen, Kundu, “A Rotation and Gray Scale
Transform Invariant Texture Identification
Using Wavelet Decomposition and Hidden
Markov Model”, IEEE Trans. Pattern
Analysis and Machine Intelligence, Vol. 16
pp.208-214, 1994.
[5.] Wu and Wei, “Rotation and Gray-Scale
Transform- Invariant Texture Classification
Using Spiral Resampling, Subband
Decomposition and Hidden Markov Model”,
IEEE Trans. Image Processing, Vol. 5,
pp.1423-1424, 1996.
[6.] Mikolajczyk, K., Schmid, “A performance
evaluation of local descriptors”, In: Proc. of
Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition
(2003).
[7.] Dalal. N, Triggs. B., “Histograms of
Oriented Gradients for Human Detection”,
In: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision
and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) (2005).
[8.] Ke, Y., Sukthankar, “R: PCA-SIFT: A more
distinctive representation for local image
descriptors”, In: Proc. of Computer Vision
and Pattern Recognition, Washington, pp.
66–75 (2004).
[9.] C. M. Zhy et al., “Segmentation of
Ultrasound Image Based on Texture Feature
and Graph Cut”, International Conference
on the Computer Science and Software
Engineering, 2008.
[10.] R.M. Haralick et al., “Textural features for
image classification”, IEEE Transaction on
System, Vol. 3, pp.610-621, 1973.
[11.] Alaa ELEYAN1, Hasan DEM˙IREL2, “Co-
occurrence matrix and its statistical features
as a new approach for face recognition”,
Turk J Elec Eng & Comp Science, Vol.19,
2011.
[12.] T. Guang Jian et al., “Automatic medical
image categorization and annotation using
LBP and MPEG-7 edge histograms”,
International Conference on Information
Technology and Applications in
Biomedicine, 2008.
[13.] T. Deselaers et al., “Deformations, patches,
and discriminative models for automatic
annotation of medical radiographs”, Pattern
Recognition Letters, Vol. 29, No. 15,
pp.2003-2010, 2008.
[14.] M. PietikaÈinen, Ojala, and Z. Xu,
“Rotation-Invariant Texture Classification
Using Feature Distributions”, Pattern
recognition, Vol. 33, pp.43-52, 2000.
[15.] T. Ojala et al., “A Comparative Study of
Texture Measures with Classification Based
on feature Distributions”, Pattern
Recognition Journal, Vol. 29, pp.51-59,
1996.
[16.] R. Obula Konda Reddy, Dr. B. Eswara
Reddy, Dr. E. Keshava Reddy, “An
Effective GLCM and Binary Pattern
Schemes Based Classification for Rotation
Invariant Fabric Textures”, International
Journal of Computer Engineering Science
(IJCES), Volume 4 Issue 1 (January 2014)
ISSN: 2250:3439.
[17.] M. Porat and Y. Zeevi, “Localized Texture
Processing in Vision: Analysis and
Synthesis in the Gaborian Space”, IEEE
Trans. Biomedical Eng., Vol. 36, pp.115-
129, 1989.
[18.] R. Porter and N. Canagarajah, “Robust
Rotation-Invariant Texture Classification:
Wavelet, Gabor Filter and GMRF Based
Schemes”, IEEE Proc. Vision, Image, and
Signal Processing, Vol. 144, pp.180-188,
1997.
[19.] T. Randen and J.H. Husoy, “Filtering for
Texture Classification: A Comparative
Study”, IEEE Trans. Pattern Analysis and
Machine Intelligence, Vol. 21, pp.291-310,
1999.
[20.] H. Tamura, S. Mori, and T. Yamawaki,
“Textural Features Corresponding to Visual
Perception”, IEEE Trans. Systems, Man, and
Cybernetics, Vol. 8, pp.460-473, 1978.

[21.] D. Lowe, “Object recognition from local
scale-invariant features”, International
Conference on Computer Vision, pp.1150-
1157, 1999.
[22.] Y. Wu and Y. Yoshida, “An Efficient
Method for Rotation and Scaling Invariant
Texture Classification”, Proc. IEEE Int'l
Conf. Acoustics, Speech, and Signal
Processing, Vol. 4, pp.2519-2522, 1995.
[23.] D. Lowe, “Distinctive image features from
scale invariant key points”, International
Conference on Computer Vision, Vol. 60,
No. 2, pp.91-110, 2004.
[24.] Sobel, “An Isotropic 3×3 Gradient
Operators, Machine Vision for Three –
Dimensional Scenes, Freeman, H.”,
Academic Pres, NY, 1990.
[25.] Prewitt, “Object Enhancement and
Extraction, Picture Processing and
Psychopictorics” (B. Lipkin and A.
Rosenfeld, Ed.), NY, Academic Pres,
pp.263-269, 1970.
[26.] Roberts, L. G., Machine Perception of
Three-Dimensional Solids, in optical and
Electro-Optical Information Processing ( J.
Tippett, Ed.), MIT Press , pp.159-177,
1965.
[27.] Ziou, D. and Tabbone, S., Edge Detection
Techniques - An Overview, Technical
Report, No. 195, Dept. Math &
Informatique, Universit de Sherbrooke,
1997.
[28.] W. T. Freeman and M. Roth, “Orientation
histograms for hand gesture recognition.
Intl. Workshop on Automatic Face and
Gesture- Recognition”, IEEE Computer
Society, Zurich, Switzerland, pp.296-301,
June 1995.
[29.] W. T. Freeman, K. Tanaka, J. Ohta, and K.
Kyuma, “Computer vision for computer
games”, 2nd International Conference on
Automatic Face and Gesture Recognition,
Killington, VT, USA, pp.100-105, October
1996.
[30.] D. M. Gavrila, “The visual analysis of
human movement: A survey”, CVIU, 73(1),
1999.
[31.] L.Wang and G. Healey, “Using Zernike
Moments for the Illumination and Geometry
Invariant Classification of Multi-Spectral
Texture”, IEEE Trans. Image Processing,
Vol. 7, pp.196-203, 1998.

A Novel Feature Extraction Scheme for Medical X-Ray Images

More Related Content

What's hot

Viewers also liked

Similar to A Novel Feature Extraction Scheme for Medical X-Ray Images

Recently uploaded

A Novel Feature Extraction Scheme for Medical X-Ray Images